ABT vs ALGN Stock Comparison
ALGN currently leads ABT in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 67 vs 55. The clearest difference is momentum.
What is the main difference between ABT and ALGN?
ALGN leads the current stock comparison as Align Technology, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Abbott Laboratories vs Align Technology, Inc.
ALGN leads
ALGN leads by 12 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Quality, and the lead has widened from 7 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support ALGN, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Abbott Laboratories
Align Technology, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors ALGN over ABT, 67 versus 55 as of Oct 31, 2026. ALGN's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and quality. ALGN also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ALGN today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. ALGN lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 7 to 12 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Abbott Laboratories and Align Technology, Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested
Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.
Compare ABT and ALGN against another ticker
Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.
AIQ Factor Divergence
Where the two separate, on the four dimensions behind the AIQ Score. Bars read outward from a shared zero: further from the centre is a wider gap.
- Momentum59 vs 76ALGN +17
- Quality55 vs 70ALGN +15
- Value51 vs 62ALGN +11
- Risk Resilience56 vs 58Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor ALGN. ALGN’s edge is concentrated in momentum and quality.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.
Largest factor move: Momentum -1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 2 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum -1
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
ALGN's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — ABT and ALGN both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
ALGN (Align Technology, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and quality.
ABT (Abbott Laboratories): the counter-case, on technicals.
Which one fits your objective
The same two names rank differently depending on what you are optimizing for. All six reads are shown at once — none of them is hidden behind a toggle.
Balanced
ALGNALGN on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
ABTABT on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
ALGNALGN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 11 points.
Momentum
ALGNALGN on the Momentum factor, by 17 points.
Lower downside
EvenDownside measures are level or not covered.
Analyst upside
ALGNALGN on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | ABT | ALGN | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +15.1% | +28.4% | ALGN has more room |
| Target dispersion | +18% | +27.5% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 11 | 6 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ALGN. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | ALGN | 55 vs 67 |
| Fundamentals | Even | revenue growth 3.3% vs 1.5%; TTM ROE 9.1% vs 10.1%; gross margin 57.1% vs 66.5%; operating margin 15.2% vs 13.3% |
| Valuation | ALGN | Value 51 vs 62 |
| Technicals | ABT | Price vs 50-day 1.4% vs -0.6%; vs 200-day 0.7% vs -9.1% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 56 vs 58 |
| Analyst expectations | ALGN | Target upside 15.1% vs 28.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of ABT and ALGN and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion is sensitive to small changes. Treat the lead as provisional and watch the flip conditions below.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 12 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Signal direction runs against the verdict: the leader is net-bearish while the laggard is net-bullish. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
Stability combines the score gap, how broadly the evidence agrees, how steady the lead has been across daily snapshots, the current signal state on both names, and analyst dispersion on ALGN.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28ALGN lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 7 to 12 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- ALGN +12
- 55 vs 67
- 7 sessions ago
- ALGN +13
- 55 vs 68
- 30 sessions ago
- ALGN +7
- 48 vs 55
- 90 sessions ago
- ABT +6
- 60 vs 54
The lead changed hands 5 times in this window, most recently on Aug 6 when ABT moved ahead of ALGN.
AIQ Signal Divergence
Only the signals that bear on the head-to-head. A conflicted name is carrying bullish and bearish rules at the same time — the technical evidence is not pointing one way.
2 bullish / 0 bearish
Only ABT
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (2.76%)
1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
Only ALGN
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (12.05%)
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: MACD Bullish Crossover.
ALGN leads the comparison while carrying a conflicted signal state, which is one reason the stability rating is not higher.
Price vs model alignment
Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +1.56%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -2.49%, AIQ -1 points).
What would flip this result
A state, not a forecast. These are the specific, observable changes that would reverse the verdict — not a price prediction.
- 1ABT closes the Momentum gap — currently 17 points behind, the largest single contributor to ALGN's edge.
- 2ABT generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish or Uptrend Structure Active.
- 3ALGN's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
The full evidence
Every number behind the verdict. The leader is called above each group so you are not left to solve it from the table.
Fundamentals
Split| Metric | ABT | ALGN |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 3.3% | 1.5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 0% | -4.4% |
| Gross margin | 57.1% | 66.5% |
| Operating margin | 15.2% | 13.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 9.1% | 10.1% |
| Debt to equity | 0.64 | 0.03 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | ABT | ALGN |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 2.1% | 1.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 3.9% | 5.7% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -2.8% | -11.4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 12.4% | -13.9% |
| Year to date | -18.1% | -1.6% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -19.1% | 13.6% |
Technicals
ABT has the stronger structure| Metric | ABT | ALGN |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 61.9 | 72.2 |
| ADX (14) | 19.1 | 24.1 |
| Price vs 50-day | 1.4% | -0.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | 0.7% | -9.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 23.6% | 23.9% |
Risk
Split| Metric | ABT | ALGN |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0 | 1.3 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.78 | 0.46 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.13 | 0.79 |
| Max drawdown | -36.8% | -29.2% |
| Current drawdown | -21.4% | -22.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 27.3% | 39.3% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.3% | -3.6% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, ABT or ALGN?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, ALGN is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 67 against ABT's 55. The edge comes from momentum and quality. This is a systematic score, not a recommendation: it ranks the two on the same evidence, it does not know your holding period or tax position.
Is ABT or ALGN the better buy right now?
ALGN carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor ALGN over ABT?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. ALGN leads Momentum by 17 points; ALGN leads Quality by 15 points; ALGN leads Value by 11 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, ABT or ALGN?
Analyst price targets imply +15.1% upside for ABT and +28.4% for ALGN, so the Street currently favors ALGN. The model and the Street agree here, which is a broader base of evidence than either alone. Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions, and dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Which is better value, ABT or ALGN?
ALGN is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. ALGN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 11 points. The Value factor reads valuation relative to sector peers and to the company's own fundamental quality, so it is not the same as simply having the lower multiple.
Which has stronger growth, ABT or ALGN?
ABT on combined revenue and EPS growth. Growth here is measured on reported revenue and earnings, not on forward estimates — it describes what the businesses have delivered, not what the Street expects next.
Which has stronger momentum, ABT or ALGN?
ALGN on the Momentum factor, by 17 points. Momentum is one of the four weighted factors in the AIQ composite. It has documented persistence over three- to twelve-month horizons, which makes it a timing input rather than a reason to hold something indefinitely.
Which is riskier, ABT or ALGN?
The two are close on downside measures. Downside measures are level or not covered. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is ABT more profitable than ALGN?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 57.1% vs 66.5%; operating margin 15.2% vs 13.3%; ttm roe 9.1% vs 10.1%. ABT leads on one measure and ALGN on two measures, and there is no single profitability composite that resolves the split — which of the two reads as "more profitable" depends on whether you weight pricing power or operating leverage.
Is ALGN's lead over ABT getting stronger or weaker?
ALGN lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 7 to 12 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has changed hands 5 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-06, when ABT moved ahead of ALGN.
What would change the ABT vs ALGN verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: ABT closes the Momentum gap — currently 17 points behind, the largest single contributor to ALGN's edge; ABT generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish or Uptrend Structure Active; ALGN's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once; a regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about ABT and ALGN?
ABT: 2 bullish / 0 bearish. ALGN: 1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted. A conflicted state means bullish and bearish rules are active on the same name at once — the technical evidence is not pointing one way, and a decision taken on it carries more timing risk. The most decision-relevant rule on ABT is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On ALGN it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare ABT and ALGN with others
Continue your research
This page answers which of the two. These answer the questions on either side of it.
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk, each carrying a fixed weight. Sentiment is reported separately as SentimentPulse and is not folded into the composite. Scores refresh every trading day, and this page regenerates from the latest snapshot rather than being written once.
The verdict names a leader, states how broadly six independent evidence groups agree, and rates how durable that conclusion is given the score gap, its recent trajectory and the current signal state on both names.
How to use side-by-side comparison →This comparison is informational and educational, not investment advice. AIQ scores update daily; re-check after earnings, guidance or macro data that materially changes either name’s factor profile.